3 and You're Out!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

There are no HS-exclusive umpires that are as good as Bob Davidson, whether you love him or hate him.

Some of the D1 guys that are former pro umpires could step in at the MLB level and do fine.

I totally disagree with that point of view. For one the level you work in baseball especially is not a reflection on your talent level in any way. There are HS only umpires that would be better than D1 guys if given the chance, but will not likely ever work that level because of availability. It is hard for many to get to a game at 1:00 in the afternoon on a week day if you have a job or family for that matter. That alone is a hindrance for many to work small college ball let alone higher level D1 ball. Secondly to be a pro umpire you have to be young enough or willing to sacrifice your life on many levels just to get that chance. I umpire that is working on their craft at other level might be just as capable to work any level if they had the time or energy to make it there. And I think there are many D1 guys that have no pro experience that could step in tomorrow and do well. I am also saying this that there would be an adjustment period to move to any level, but I do not think it would take long for many across the country to take Davidson's job and be a long time answer. What we do at the lower levels of baseball is not that drastically different than what they do at the pro level, you are just dealing with different personalities and different attitudes. But do not tell me with the attitude and the way Davidson carries himself on the field that someone could not do what he does and be perceived better.

Peace

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I totally disagree with that point of view. For one the level you work in baseball especially is not a reflection on your talent level in any way. There are HS only umpires that would be better than D1 guys if given the chance, but will not likely ever work that level because of availability. It is hard for many to get to a game at 1:00 in the afternoon on a week day if you have a job or family for that matter. That alone is a hindrance for many to work small college ball let alone higher level D1 ball. Secondly to be a pro umpire you have to be young enough or willing to sacrifice your life on many levels just to get that chance. I umpire that is working on their craft at other level might be just as capable to work any level if they had the time or energy to make it there. And I think there are many D1 guys that have no pro experience that could step in tomorrow and do well. I am also saying this that there would be an adjustment period to move to any level, but I do not think it would take long for many across the country to take Davidson's job and be a long time answer. What we do at the lower levels of baseball is not that drastically different than what they do at the pro level, you are just dealing with different personalities and different attitudes. But do not tell me with the attitude and the way Davidson carries himself on the field that someone could not do what he does and be perceived better.

Peace

I don't think it is a hard and fast rule about working at the level of your talent, but in this area at least, I don't know of many (Or any) HS-only umpires who wouldn't get eaten alive in even a D2 game.

I'm not talking about whether or not someone at the high school level or college level could work their way to MLB if they had the time/money/inclination. I agree with you that they could. There are guys working various levels of baseball that could be as good as MLB umpires if they had the time/money/etc. to do it.

I am talking about running a high school umpire out there this weekend in an MLB game compared to Bob Davidson or any other MLB umpire. It would be far worse than these guys working the NFL preseason games right now.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I don't think it is a hard and fast rule about working at the level of your talent, but in this area at least, I don't know of many (Or any) HS-only umpires who wouldn't get eaten alive in even a D2 game.

I'm not talking about whether or not someone at the high school level or college level could work their way to MLB if they had the time/money/inclination. I agree with you that they could. There are guys working various levels of baseball that could be as good as MLB umpires if they had the time/money/etc. to do it.

I am talking about running a high school umpire out there this weekend in an MLB game compared to Bob Davidson or any other MLB umpire. It would be far worse than these guys working the NFL preseason games right now.

I did not say that you could run anyone out there and they would be better. Of course this would be dependent on the person you bring out there. I even think it is easier to make that transition because baseball rules are not that different. Baseball does not have the complicated rules that football has with the college level and NFL level. There are not on a regular basis the kind of situations NFL guys have to face with very complicated and once in a season situations. Even the basic situations are complicated in football. What does a baseball umpire have to do the most? Call balls and strikes; get an occasional tough call at a base? Even the speed of the overall game outside of the pitchers is not going to be that drastic, if you have good timing and good concept of what your strike zone is. Again, I am talking about Davidson specifically more than anything. I do not think he is at the top of his profession at that level. I think he is at the lower end or a guy many would not miss. Again my opinion and certainly you have the right to disagree with me (be my guest), but I have seen talented guys that could replace him now and I am sure there are guys at the AAA level that certainly would do just fine in his spot.

Peace

[BigBaldGuy]

This is pretty simple...if the player is tagged out...I say show me the ball...then I either bang them out or call them safe if he cant show me the ball...not that tough.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not say that you could run anyone out there and they would be better. Of course this would be dependent on the person you bring out there. I even think it is easier to make that transition because baseball rules are not that different. Baseball does not have the complicated rules that football has with the college level and NFL level. There are not on a regular basis the kind of situations NFL guys have to face with very complicated and once in a season situations. Even the basic situations are complicated in football. What does a baseball umpire have to do the most? Call balls and strikes; get an occasional tough call at a base? Even the speed of the overall game outside of the pitchers is not going to be that drastic, if you have good timing and good concept of what your strike zone is. Again, I am talking about Davidson specifically more than anything. I do not think he is at the top of his profession at that level. I think he is at the lower end or a guy many would not miss. Again my opinion and certainly you have the right to disagree with me (be my guest), but I have seen talented guys that could replace him now and I am sure there are guys at the AAA level that certainly would do just fine in his spot.

Peace

Of course there are AAA guys that would do fine in his spot. Most of the callups are very competent and some would be in the top half of MLB umpires if they were full time.

I disagree that the overall speed of the game at that level is not drastic. The difference between lower level college games and D1 is drastic, and then there is a difference between D1 and the higher levels of MiLB. There is a HUGE difference in the speed of the game from HS to MLB.

Another part that would tough for most HS umpires is going from 2-man to 4-man mechanics without a good amount of training/instruction. (Or even 3-man)

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by BigBaldGuy

This is pretty simple...if the player is tagged out...I say show me the ball...then I either bang them out or call them safe if he cant show me the ball...not that tough.

I would recommend finding the ball without asking the fielder.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Of course there are AAA guys that would do fine in his spot. Most of the callups are very competent and some would be in the top half of MLB umpires if they were full time.

I disagree that the overall speed of the game at that level is not drastic. The difference between lower level college games and D1 is drastic, and then there is a difference between D1 and the higher levels of MiLB. There is a HUGE difference in the speed of the game from HS to MLB.

Another part that would tough for most HS umpires is going from 2-man to 4-man mechanics without a good amount of training/instruction. (Or even 3-man)

What speed? Until recently we were using metal bats where the ball was coming off of the bats at a higher rate of speed than MLB in many cases could produce with wood. And that is only about the ball, not the players for the most part. Actually older players tend to make many plays routine that younger players make much more difficult.

This is not a sport where you have to move faster because the players are faster and we have to keep up with them. The speed of the game in other sports where the ball is not factor is harder to officiate. In baseball we are mostly in a fixed position and only move when the ball is hit. I do not see that as a hard transition for anyone with decent and good training.

And I have seen an umpire get hurt in the MLB and was forced to 3 man to cover the game and those umpires looked lost on how to cover basic plays, which is understandable considering that is not a regular thing for them. But do not tell me a guy that now does not have to move that much is at a huge disadvantage. We will just have to disagree on this one. Considering that all of this conversation is because MLB umpires did something that is basic more than once and would make an HS umpire look very bad, that is not a good reflection on their ability to do their job. Yes we all make mistakes, but not those kinds of mistakes if you have been to any training. I do not think I have ever done this personally and I cannot think of 3 times where a partner did this at the HS level. I have never seen this at the college level. It does not make me perfect, it just means that I know that I have to wait and so do my partners before we make a call. It is a vital part of our job especially at a close play at home where collisions and the ball comes out frequently. Either it is ability or apathy.

Peace

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I would recommend finding the ball without asking the fielder.

I think this is dependant on the level of play. In a HS game or above, I agree that we don't need to ask a fielder to show us the ball. At lower levels of ball it's not a bad thing to do. I've seen many times when a fielder has applied what looked to be a tag with possesion of the ball end up with the ball under the runner or even the fielder. They both just look up at you while laying in a pile with a deer in the headlights look waiting for you to make a call. A simple "show me the ball" gives them the hint they're looking for.

YMMV

Tim.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

I think this is dependant on the level of play. In a HS game or above, I agree that we don't need to ask a fielder to show us the ball. At lower levels of ball it's not a bad thing to do. I've seen many times when a fielder has applied what looked to be a tag with possesion of the ball end up with the ball under the runner or even the fielder. They both just look up at you while laying in a pile with a deer in the headlights look waiting for you to make a call. A simple "show me the ball" gives them the hint they're looking for.

YMMV

Tim.

There are HS or college players that do not know to do that on certain plays. I have no problem with someone asking if they have not shown them some evidence that they caught the ball. Usually a player that has caught the ball is very willing to show the ball to prove they made the play. I do not see this as a big deal as it is better to make the call based on them having the ball then making a call and assuming.

Peace

[Steve Meyer]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

I think this is dependant on the level of play. In a HS game or above, I agree that we don't need to ask a fielder to show us the ball. At lower levels of ball it's not a bad thing to do. I've seen many times when a fielder has applied what looked to be a tag with possesion of the ball end up with the ball under the runner or even the fielder. They both just look up at you while laying in a pile with a deer in the headlights look waiting for you to make a call. A simple "show me the ball" gives them the hint they're looking for.

YMMV

Tim.

What do you do if one of them throws the ball at you after asking to see it?

Just saying.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There are HS or college players that do not know to do that on certain plays. I have no problem with someone asking if they have not shown them some evidence that they caught the ball. Usually a player that has caught the ball is very willing to show the ball to prove they made the play. I do not see this as a big deal as it is better to make the call based on them having the ball then making a call and assuming.

Peace

I'm with you, Jeff. The reason I don't think we need to do it in HS and above is because the players at that level know they need to show us the ball on these type of plays. Perhaps it's because both youth associations I belong to instruct our umpires to ask to see the ball, and the HS players that came through those programs are accustomed to it.

Tim.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

I'm with you, Jeff. The reason I don't think we need to do it in HS and above is because the players at that level know they need to show us the ball on these type of plays. Perhaps it's because both youth associations I belong to instruct our umpires to ask to see the ball, and the HS players that came through those programs are accustomed to it.

Tim.

I do not disagree with that position at all. I just do not see a major problem if someone does either way. But I would not call someone out if it is unclear if they caught the ball. Sometimes it is obvious.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not disagree with that position at all. I just do not see a major problem if someone does either way. But I would not call someone out if it is unclear if they caught the ball. Sometimes it is obvious.

Peace

True, but at least 4 times this year, a MLB umpire called a player out when the fielder did not, in fact, have the ball.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not disagree with that position at all. I just do not see a major problem if someone does either way. But I would not call someone out if it is unclear if they caught the ball. Sometimes it is obvious.

Peace

The potential problem is when the fielder raises his glove/mitt to show you the ball (after you've directed him to do so), and the ball pops out. Now you have a no-tag, and it's all your fault.

It is the umpire's job to find the ball, unassisted.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

The potential problem is when the fielder raises his glove/mitt to show you the ball (after you've directed him to do so), and the ball pops out. Now you have a no-tag, and it's all your fault.

It is the umpire's job to find the ball, unassisted.

You lost me here. What do you mean the ball pops out? If you have the tag with the ball, why would it fall out afterwards and be your fault?

Peace